I Would Like to Amend My Recent Remarks Calling for the Imminent Death of the Wing

Happy Monday.

Evelyn Hockstein/The Washington Post/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

I never thought I would get to go to the Wing, the women-only co-working space and “diverse community open to all” whose demise I gleefully cheered for just a few weeks ago. I resented the place, frequented by the likes of Lena Dunham and Tavi Gevinson, because I considered its $2,350 yearly New York price tag antithetical to its stated egalitarian mission. When I visited last week to see Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), the first cisgender man to speak at the venue, I realized my objections were more complicated than I had thought.

As the Wing’s communications manager led me on a tour of the two-story, 10,000-square-foot SoHo location before Booker arrived, I realized that my pseudo-Marxist objections to the $215 monthly membership fees were unreasonable; the amenities are worth the price. At the SoHo Wing—one of 10 locations around the world—there are comfortable places to read or write, drenched in sunlight that filters in from floor-to-ceiling windows on the eastern wall. There are showers and complimentary hair-and-beauty products and a workout room with Peloton bikes. There are phone booths and conference rooms, a breast pump and a children’s daycare area, a convenient cafe, book clubs and private events—and all the luxuries of a space without men. A hot desk at a nearby WeWork starts at $520 per month, but the Wing seems to offer so much more.

But as much as I love the idea of a space where women can breastfeed without shame, or work in the absence of leering men, I found the millennial-pink-drenched aesthetics overwhelming and impractical, like femininity itself. The phone booths, painted with the names of fictional female characters like Hermione Granger and Ramona Quimby, seem somehow infantilizing, creating Instagram-ready expressions of feminist solidarity out of little glass rooms that would suffice to be purely functional. I thumbed a succulent plant by the window. It felt like plastic, but I couldn’t be sure. Most strikingly, the books that cover the beautiful ceiling-high shelves are arranged not by author or genre, but by color—which, the communications rep conceded, makes it hard to locate a title. Sacrificing functionality for style sounds to me a lot like trying to walk in high heels.

Wing co-founder Audrey Gelman and Jennifer Lawrence speak at the SoHo location in 2018, surrounded by those color-coordinated bookshelves.

Monica Schipper/Getty

And many of the members wore high heels. The women waiting for Booker in folding chairs all exuded an effortless, Glossier-inspired beauty. Women sported snow-white Reeboks, somehow undefiled by the city’s grime. One applied a skillful stroke of lip gloss as Booker spoke. Marguerite Ward, writing for CNBC, noted the near-oppressive stylishness of the Wing’s clientele: “I get it: If I don’t want to dress like the stylish women around me, then that’s my prerogative…But surrounded by successful women dressed to a T, I might want to keep up.” And considering how central female beauty standards—and the rejection or acceptance thereof—are to feminist discourse, aesthetics matter.

“If the atmosphere of the whole place were a little less pink, and by that I mean a little less traditionally feminine, maybe I’d feel more comfortable,” Ward concludes, and I agree. Audrey Gelman, co-founder of the Wing and the inspiration for Marnie’s character on Girls, refers to members as “winglets.” At high points in Booker’s remarks, the audience erupted not into applause, but into a quiet chorus of snapping fingers. If only the vibe were a little less twee and the amenities a little less luxurious, and the membership price a little lower, the Wing would be a wonderland. It is, in short, like communism: a good idea, poorly executed.

But I was genuinely curious about the titles that lined the color-coded shelves—would I find a copy of The Beauty Myth?—and I hoped to browse the library before I headed out. I also thought I’d ask some of the members about their preferences for the Democratic presidential nomination and how they felt about Booker. But as soon as the New Jersey senator left the room, I was ushered to the door. I may be a woman, but Wing member I am not. 

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate